they saw one casting out devils, and that he forbid him, because he did not follow them; did Jesus say, call fire from heaven and consume them? or did he even say go and cast him into prison? No, Gentlemen, he said, "forbid them not." You condemn this spirit of persecution in others, but cherish it among yourselves. If the various reformers that have been, and to whom the Protestant church owes its present establishment, had not been at li- › berty to express their thoughts, you yourselves would have been groaning under that yoke of oppressive superstition, you beheld in the Catholic church. Then why not let us advance unmolested and unfettered, towards that height of intellectual perfection, to which you perceive mankind is rapidly advancing. Remember Galileo was condemned and imprisoned for maintaining an opinion which is contrary to the tenor of your holy book; but now, having become more enlightened, you acknowledge that his opinion was correct, having since had demonstration of it. Religion is nothing more than a system of faith, and what is faith? Ask Paul: Hebrews chap. xi. ver. 1, where he says, that "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." I would ask you, what substance can there be in things hoped for? Would your belly be filled by merely hoping for a dinner? or what evidence can you have of things you nor any one living has ever seen? I will not say, though that man have no faith, notwithstanding I once believed, that God put "a lying spirit in the mouth" of 400 prophets, as it is recorded in 1st Kings chap. xxii. ver. 23; and that he told Ezekiel to bake his bread with "man's dung," as it is said in Ezekiel chap. iv. ver. 12; but my belief did not make it any more true, than Judge Hale's belief in witchcraft; for, if he did not believe in witches, he must have been a very wicked man to condemn to the stake people accused of witchcraft. Faith, therefore, being so deceitful, it is neither just nor wise to command us to believe that, for which, as I have before proved, we can have no direct evidence; but if you punish for what is both deceitful and involuntary, it must be most unjust and cruel; for a man can only believe or disbelieve, according as evidence appeareth unto him. Besides, you

know that religion is one thing in one country and another thing in another country; it is also one thing in one age and another thing in another age; and you cannot say, that, although we may refuse obedience to your divine law, as you call it, we refuse obedience to the moral law. Why not then let every man worship God, or no God if he likes, in his own way, so that he doth no injury to his fellow creatures?

If you conceive that our opinions proceed from ignorance, why do not you, who have knowledge, shew us our ignorance and instruct us? But if it is proved to proceed from knowledge; why then should knowledge be persecuted? Does not Solomon tell us in his proverbs, chap. iv. ver. 7, "that wisdom is the principal thing; therefore, get wisdom, (says he) and with all thy getting, get understanding." He moreover tells you, that " none but fools despise wisdom and instruction." Now we are willing to be instructed; but this is not the way to instruct us, by casting us into prisons upon door-mats, and locking us up among thieves, swindlers, drunkards, and gamesters, which has been the case since my imprisonment, aud amongst whom I was despised, because I would not game, swear, and drink with them. Yet those men called themselves Christians, went to chapel on the Sunday in the prison, and when they came down, would look upon me with horror, considering me far worse than themselves! Even the principal clerk in Mr. Shelton's office, when asked, last Saturday, by a friend of mine, whether a bill had been returned against me or not; put on a look of the most consummate malignity, and, with all the insolence of office, exclaimed to my friend: "I wonder you are not ashamed to apply for any thing of the kind; a man like that I should despise. Publishing a blasphemous libel against the Christian religion! why he is worse by half than a common thief." I cannot but observe, on the false and malignant statement, concerning the defence and behaviour of William Campion last Tuesday, by the editor of the old Times. They may do the same by me if they think proper; but, Gentlemen, is this spirit consistent with the spirit of Christianity? No, you find in Jude chap. ix., that "when Michael the Archangel was contending with the devil about the body of Moses, he durst not rail against him, but only said, the Lord rebuke thee." Even Paul himself, though "Alexander, the coppersmith," did him so much evil, only said, "the Lord reward him according to his works." (Read 2d Timothy chap. iv. ver. 14.) How do you know but that the Lord" hath sent me a strong delusion, that I might believe a lie, and be damned," as he has promised shall be the case? Read 2d Thessalonians chap. ii. ver. 11. Will you dare attempt to frustrate his design? Did he not tell Shimei to go and curse David (Read 2d Samuel chap. xvi. ver. 10) the man after God's own heart? And how knowest thou, O man, but the Lord has put it into my heart

Is not a

to say David is a murderer, an adulterer, a liar? But what did David say-Go bring him and cast him in prison? No, David told them to "Let him alone," and if David did not mind people calling him bad names, what need you trouble yourselves about it? Are not the Jews an instance of the "severity and goodness of God." (Read Romans chap. xi. ver. 23.) "What, though some of the branches be broken off, he is able (without your assistence) to graft them in again." At least, it appears evident to me, that prosecutions will never graft them in again; for not one person, who has been prosecuted, has ever been converted; and if you will still persist in prosecutions, instead of building more. churches, you will find occasion to build more gaols; for prisons will not intimidate an Englishman, when he knows his cause is good. It is in vain, then, for you to attempt to force a religion upon the people. I told the Alderman so at Guildhall when I was taken before him; but he said, that the religion was accepted. How can you call it accepted, Gentlemen, when people are forced to pay for it? poor shoemaker, if detected in selling an old pair of shoes on a Sunday, though they may not be worth two and sixpence, forced to pay eight shillings fiue for it? And how often have I seen a poor old woman, who, having a large family to support, is obliged, in order to procure them bread for the Monday, to sell apples, nuts, or gingerbread, on the Sunday, for God don't send us double allowance of food on the Saturday, as he used to do; I beg pardon, Gentlemen, it was on a Friday he used to do such wonderful things, when the sabbath was on the Saturday; but since those days God hath changed his mind, although James says, that " with him there is no shadow of turning," no variableness whatever, being "the same to day he was yesterday:" how of ten, then, have I seen a something in a human shape, with a large coat and red collar, with stick in his hand, throw the poor old woman's stall, with her whole fortune in the dirt, merely, because she did not go to church like other fools and hypocrites. Do you think this makes her more religious? No, Gentlemen, it gives her more reason to curse both religion and its supporters. Even the poor old people, who, through the enormous weight of taxes, are sunk into a workhouse are mulcted out of their small pittance of meat, if found absent from their chapel. Who can say, then, that religion is not forced upon the people; but Christianity does not authorize you to do those things, as I have proved to you: you are commanded to "follow after those things which make for peace," and to leave

66

those "secret things to God." I warrant you, he knows how to act better than you do. And now, Gentlemen, after what I have said in defence of Christianity, for surely it must be admitted, I have been defending Christianity from the innovations which you have made in it, should any one present feel inclined to make me any acknowledgment, it will be more than I aimed at or expected. To proceed further I conceive to be unnecessary, as I think any reasonable man would be convinced, that this prosecution is unjust and unlawful, as well as contrary to God's word written; besides an usurped authority in bringing me before this court, when the laws of England forbid it, as I have proved; for you not being saints qualified" to judge angels," are not qualified to judge me; because you have not given yourselves "continually to prayer and the ministry of the word," like the saints of old, read Acts chap. vi. ver. 4. But, as I suppose by your appearance, you are serving tables," you cannot be the proper persons appointed to try me, you will, therefore, accordingly acquit me, though I am very willing to be consigned over to the Ecclesiastical Court of Saints, and there engage agreeably to the aforesaid challenge which I have given. But if you, Gentlemen, do conscientiously believe on your oath, that this prosecution is lawful and just, agreeably to the precepts given in this holy book, which is the foundation of the religion of your country that tolerates Freethinkers, Unitarians, and Jews, I must "search those Scriptures," and see whether those epithets contained in the indictment be true or false; for, if I utter any thing against public or private individuals, their persons and their characters must be made known before it can be ascertained, whether what I have said be true or false; and as the persons whose characters I am accused of defaming, are men unknown to any person in the present age, having departed this life upwards of one, two, three, and four thousand years since, who lived in kingdoms not now extant, and whose posterity you treat with indignity and scorn, there can be no other way of proving the truth or falsehood of those epithets, but by examining their lives as recorded in this holy book. I know not, Gentlemen, whether it is customary to put questions to the jury, or whether it is contrary to the rules; for never having been in such a place before, I am unacquainted with its laws. I should wish to be informed, Gentlemen, what is your opinion of this prosecution. (Here the defendant left off speaking, seeming to wait for a reply, when the Recorder said, the Jury could not argue with the defendant, and several of the Jury stood up, and said something to the Recorder, but we could not distinctly hear. The Jury seated themselves again, and the defendant receiving no answer, proceeded.) Well, Gentlemen, I perceive by the passages selected for prosecution (looking into the Republican), that I am charged with not only calling Noah, Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, Jesus, and Paul, a band of rob

bers, murderers, liars, impostors, &c.; but that the Bible is a book of contradictions, fables, and nonsense. I will, therefore, begin at the beginning; but first, (taking up the Bible) hear what Bishop Porteus says in this book, for it is called by his name, page 9, "It is true, indeed, that in the historical books of the Old Tes tament, there are some bad characters and bad actions recorded, and some very cruel deeds described:" thus you see, Gentlemen, that the Bishop himself tells you there are some bad characters, and I have done no more than tell you their names, which it appears he was unwilling to do. (The defendant then turned to the 1st chapter of Genesis and said) If this be the word of a God, it will be found clear, positive, and distinctly worded. I shall now begin with the first book of Moses called Genesis. (The defendant then read, without commenting, to chap. ix. ver. 21, as he seemed fearful of being interrupted, but every remarkable passage he met with, he read over again, and several words he would lay a much stronger emphasis on, that it might be particularly observed, such as FLAMING SWORD, which might have been heard a considerable distance out of court, and this way of reading he continued until he was exhausted. He then said) Now, Gentlemen, my indictment accuses me of calling Noah a drunkard, here in the nineteenth chapter, verse 21, you find these words, “he was drunken." I leave this to your consideration, and proceed

The Recorder said, a person who accidentally was overcome with liquor, could not be called a drunkard. The word drunkard could only be applied to persons who habituated themselves to drinking immoderately.

Defendant then read on till he found "cursed be Canaan." Who was this Canaan? Why, Gentlemen, it was Noah's grandson. And what had he done to be so cursed? Nothing: his grandfather got beastly drunk, and his father looked at him, and so, he must be cursed for it, and that too by his drunken old grandfather. Shameful!

He then read to verse 30, chap. x. when the Recorder asked him, what were his objects in reading the Bible?

The defendant replied, I am charged with asserting that this book, the Bible, is a book of contradictions, fables, and nonsense, and I must read it to prove the truth of it; and is not this chapter a proof? What have you learnt from this chapter, a chapter of jaw-breaking words, and is not this nonsense?

The Recorder said, when this was written, it was all necessary to the people it was written to.

The defendant said, whatever it might be to those it was written to, it was nonsense to him, and he would prove, in the course of the work, it was nonsense to them it was written to; for he would prove by and bye, it was not written till the reign of Cyrus, king